Originally Posted by
SilverChris
In terms of sleep comfort the later J products (2013/2017) aren't much better.
The -200ERs aren't that bad, IMO. They're not cutting edge but the J product is still far better than what TK offers.
Yes, and the earlier 77Ws.
I don't know if I can agree with this. I have flown TK's long haul 2-2-2 J (though with an empty seat beside) twice and I much prefer it, I got much better quality sleep. I also remember the IFE being a lot more modern, if one cares about that kind of thing.
The particular bird I flew (SQ392) on Feb 23rd was 9V-SVG. The wear and tear on the hard product was borderline unacceptable, with leather pieces coming out and simple mechanical things like light on/off not behaving properly (FA had to give it a few hard whacks before giving up, I just didn't use my reading light). The IFE screen was so bad (low res is an understatement) it reminded me of days when we use VHS. I spent most of my waking hours sampling the alcohol menu until I passed out.
I've also flown J in SQ's A350 and yes while not that "much better" the slight tweak in ergonomics may have improved it slightly. It is also a lot newer, so wear and tear should not be as big of an issue.
I'm not a fan of the "flip over" turn into bed mechanism, even less of a fan of the awkward angle when in bed mode.
The B772s are deployed into lesser routes such as PER (5 hours) or BNE (8 hours), or even shorter regional routes where sleep might not be as important. For IST (11 hours) especially departing at 2am it is a different case. Just something to keep in mind.
The only saving grace was that the load of pax in J was really light, so we got really attentive service. Also maybe why SQ cannot justify deploying better aircraft on this route (pure speculation).
Also it is important to note we are comparing the hard product. SQ's soft product is unrivaled, at least in my opinion. Enough for me to choose SQ over TK.
To each his own
